Replies

No one is impugning [and where did you get it?]. A captain has sufficiently small command so he could still do some [sometimes a lot] of management work. The presidency, OTOH, is beyond the CNO level, and has to deal in sweeping generalities. Compare Reagan [charismatic leader who delegated away [almost] everything except the leadership proper, i.e. the inspirational/projectional part] with Carter - nitpicking manager [up to and including the tennis courts at WH],who never had any idea of what the leadership is, and correspondingly failed at it.
I could tell you a small but interesting story on it: in '84 Reagan had a campaign stop in Rochester NY. The event was held at the local ice hockey stadium, some 12000 people; he was far away and projected on a large screen. Some lefties on the crowd periphery tried to unfurl some posters of protest. These baboons were spontaneously [and coming from former USSR, I know how the organized form looks like] - so, they were spontaneously manhandled by the crowd, and not by the security. Reagan was too far away [and had sufficiently poor eyesight] to even notice them, let alone to react to them. There were no orders, and it was not done by the plainclothesmen. Being there, I happened to see it up close. This was the leadership stuff in its rough, primeval state - ability to inspire [even if somewhat misguided] devotion.
And this is precisely what is needed in the president, for scheduling White house tennis courts, policy details and other such could be delegated to others. Once properly "inspired", these others would catch the orders as if by telepathy, even if no orders are given, and would do just what would be expected. In a sense, being immersed in the leadership field, they tune to its proper wavelength and act accordingly. It is not easy to generate such a field, but when one could do it, it could be extremely efficient. Otherwise at that level one will bogged down in detail, like carter was.